In vitro activity of new azoles luliconazole and lanoconazole compared with ten other antifungal drugs against clinical dermatophyte isolates
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society for Human and Animal Mycology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissionsoup.com..
In vitro susceptibilities of 100 clinical dermatophyte isolates belonging to five species from Iran toward lanoconazole and luliconazole were compared with ten other antifungal agents including econazole, itraconazole, miconazole, fluconazole, griseofulvin, butenafine, terbinafine, caspofungin, anidulafungin and tolnaftate. MIC and MEC values were analyzed according to CLSI M38-A2 document. The isolates were previously identified to the species level using PCR-RFLP on ITS rDNA region. The range of luliconazole and lanoconazole minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) was 0.016-0.032 and 0.063-1 μg/ml, respectively for dermatophyte species. Luliconazole and lanoconazole revealed potent activity against all dermatophyte isolates. Anidulafungin, caspofungin, and luliconazole showed the best activity with the lowest geometric mean 0.01, 0.016, and 0.018 μg/ml, respectively, followed by tolnaftate (0.06 μg/ml), terbinafine (0.07 μg/ml), itraconazole (0.183 μg/ml), butenafine (0.188 μg/ml), econazole (0.20 μg/ml), lanoconazole (0.24 μg/ml), griseofulvin (1.28 μg/ml), miconazole (2.34 μg/ml) and fluconazole (15.34 μg/ml). The current study demonstrated luliconazole and lanoconazole displayed excellent activity against all dermatophyte isolates, although the majority of dermatophyte isolates showed low susceptibility to griseofulvin and very low to miconazole, and fluconazole.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2016 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2016 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:54 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Medical mycology - 54(2016), 7 vom: 01. Okt., Seite 757-63 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Baghi, Nesa [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
4E7858311F |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 20.03.2017 Date Revised 02.12.2018 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1093/mmy/myw016 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM259778893 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM259778893 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231224191935.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231224s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1093/mmy/myw016 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n0865.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM259778893 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)27118804 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Baghi, Nesa |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a In vitro activity of new azoles luliconazole and lanoconazole compared with ten other antifungal drugs against clinical dermatophyte isolates |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2016 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 20.03.2017 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 02.12.2018 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society for Human and Animal Mycology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissionsoup.com. | ||
| 520 | |a In vitro susceptibilities of 100 clinical dermatophyte isolates belonging to five species from Iran toward lanoconazole and luliconazole were compared with ten other antifungal agents including econazole, itraconazole, miconazole, fluconazole, griseofulvin, butenafine, terbinafine, caspofungin, anidulafungin and tolnaftate. MIC and MEC values were analyzed according to CLSI M38-A2 document. The isolates were previously identified to the species level using PCR-RFLP on ITS rDNA region. The range of luliconazole and lanoconazole minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) was 0.016-0.032 and 0.063-1 μg/ml, respectively for dermatophyte species. Luliconazole and lanoconazole revealed potent activity against all dermatophyte isolates. Anidulafungin, caspofungin, and luliconazole showed the best activity with the lowest geometric mean 0.01, 0.016, and 0.018 μg/ml, respectively, followed by tolnaftate (0.06 μg/ml), terbinafine (0.07 μg/ml), itraconazole (0.183 μg/ml), butenafine (0.188 μg/ml), econazole (0.20 μg/ml), lanoconazole (0.24 μg/ml), griseofulvin (1.28 μg/ml), miconazole (2.34 μg/ml) and fluconazole (15.34 μg/ml). The current study demonstrated luliconazole and lanoconazole displayed excellent activity against all dermatophyte isolates, although the majority of dermatophyte isolates showed low susceptibility to griseofulvin and very low to miconazole, and fluconazole | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Comparative Study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Dermatophytes | |
| 650 | 4 | |a in vitro antifungal susceptibility | |
| 650 | 4 | |a lanoconazole | |
| 650 | 4 | |a luliconazole | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Antifungal Agents |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a DNA, Ribosomal Spacer |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Imidazoles |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a latoconazole |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 4E7858311F |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a luliconazole |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a RE91AN4S8G |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Shokohi, Tahereh |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Badali, Hamid |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Makimura, Koichi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rezaei-Matehkolaei, Ali |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Abdollahi, Maryam |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Didehdar, Mojtaba |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Haghani, Iman |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Abastabar, Mahdi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Medical mycology |d 1997 |g 54(2016), 7 vom: 01. Okt., Seite 757-63 |w (DE-627)NLM097151785 |x 1460-2709 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:54 |g year:2016 |g number:7 |g day:01 |g month:10 |g pages:757-63 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myw016 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 54 |j 2016 |e 7 |b 01 |c 10 |h 757-63 | ||